IMPACT OF LOW FLOW ON SURVIVAL AFTER AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT FOR SEVERE AORTIC STENOSIS

2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (10) ◽  
pp. S131
Author(s):  
M. Clavel ◽  
M. Berthelot-Richer ◽  
F. Le Ven ◽  
R. Capoulade ◽  
A. Dahou ◽  
...  
Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zaher Fanari ◽  
Dimitrios Barmpouletos ◽  
Vivek K Reddy ◽  
Sumaya Hammami ◽  
Zugui Zhang ◽  
...  

Background: The impact of aortic valve replacement (AVR) versus medical management (MM) in patients with paradoxical low flow is unclear. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes of AVR versus MM in patients with severe aortic stenosis and normal ejection fraction and different transaortic flow and gradient. Methods: We identified consecutive patients presenting to our echo lab with an aortic valve area (AVA) < 1.0cm 2 and EF≥ 50%. We stratify patients depending on gradient (≥ 40 vs. < 40 mmHg) and stroke volume index (SVI < 35 vs. ≥35 ml/m 2 ). 4 groups were identified (, normal flow, high gradient [NF/HG]; normal flow, low gradient [NF/LG]; low flow, high gradient [LF/HG] and low flow, low gradient [LF/LG]. These 4 groups were also stratified depending on management (AVR vs. MM). All patients were retrospectively followed for the occurrence of death. Results: A total of 954 patients were included in analysis. Mean follow up was 2.45 ± 1.9 years. The mean age was 75.4 ± 5.6 years. Comparing all 4 AS subgroups, the mortality was higher in LF/HG followed by LF/LG, NF/HG and NF/LG (LF/HG 37.1% vs. LF/LG 33.9% vs. NF/HG 30.3%vs. NF/LG 20.2%; Log Rank Test, P=0.003). Patients who underwent medical therapy have a higher mortality than the overall cohort in all subgroups (LF/HG 44.3% vs. NF/HG 36.6% vs. LF/LG 33.7% vs. NF/LG 21.2%; Log Rank Test, P=0.001). Patients with HG had a higher chance of getting aortic valve replacement (AVR) than those with LF/LG and NF/LG (20.7% NF/HG vs. 10.6% LF/HG vs. 4.7% LF/LG and 3.6% NF/LG; P=0.01). Patients who underwent AVR had lower mortality rates when compared with the overall cohort in all subgroups (LF/HG 21.4% vs. 18.9% NF/HG vs. 6.6% LF/LG and 7.1% NF/LG; Log Rank Test, P= 0.253). Conclusion: Patients with LF/LG represent an under-recognized high-risk group with similar prognosis to NF/HG. Although these patients may benefit tremendously from AVR, they are less likely to undergo AVR when compared to HG patients.


2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Barbara E. Stähli ◽  
Thi Dan Linh Nguyen-Kim ◽  
Cathérine Gebhard ◽  
Thomas Frauenfelder ◽  
Felix C. Tanner ◽  
...  

Low-flow low-gradient severe aortic stenosis (LFLGAS) is associated with worse outcomes. Aortic valve calcification patterns of LFLGAS as compared to non-LFLGAS have not yet been thoroughly assessed. 137 patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with preprocedural multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and postprocedural transthoracic echocardiography were enrolled. Calcification characteristics were assessed by MDCT both for the total aortic valve and separately for each leaflet. 34 patients had LFLGAS and 103 non-LFLGAS. Total aortic valve calcification volume (p<0.001), mass (p<0.001), and density (p=0.004) were lower in LFLGAS as compared to non-LFLGAS patients. At 30-day follow-up, mean transaortic pressure gradients and more than mild paravalvular regurgitation did not differ between groups. In conclusion, LFLGAS and non-LFLGAS express different calcification patterns which, however, did not impact on device success after TAVR.


2015 ◽  
Vol 65 (7) ◽  
pp. 645-653 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-Annick Clavel ◽  
Maxime Berthelot-Richer ◽  
Florent Le Ven ◽  
Romain Capoulade ◽  
Abdellaziz Dahou ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 82 (8) ◽  
pp. 2199-2205
Author(s):  
Suguru Miyazaki ◽  
Kenji Kuwaki ◽  
Kan Kajimoto ◽  
Satoshi Matsushita ◽  
Shizuyuki Dohi ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document